• Welcome to Smashboards, the world's largest Super Smash Brothers community! Over 250,000 Smash Bros. fans from around the world have come to discuss these great games in over 19 million posts!

    You are currently viewing our boards as a visitor. Click here to sign up right now and start on your path in the Smash community!

Allow Topless Women? (Mature Content)

Status
Not open for further replies.

Dr. James Rustles

Daxinator
Joined
Mar 24, 2008
Messages
4,019
first off dont blow what i said out of realisticness, i didnt say itd be the end of the world, ffs stop tryign to alter what i say to make your points easyer =.=

and secondly "you'd have to wonder how much sanity they had left anyway" you have to remember how many people are at this state in Amrica
You're evading the issue as you didn't address my linking to a site that disproves a claim that there would be a significant increase in stalker/**** cases. In fact, you did not say anything significant in that post.

I never claimed that you said it would be the end of the world. You, sirch, were addressed later in the post. Calm down and make yourself clear.
 

Zero Beat

Cognitive Scientist
Joined
Apr 12, 2006
Messages
3,924
Location
MIT Observatory
NNID
BLUE
3DS FC
4141-3279-8878
your attempts to make an argument by calling me stupid doesn't really work, only the incredibly stupid don't know ho to read posts and try to bash people for no reason >_>
You two are arguing, not debating. The purpose of a debate is to learn from each other's statements.

The increase in **** is just a fantasy already disproved by Quilt. If you think about it, people wouldn't care after a while.(If this topless thing was to be pulled off)

How old are you? How exciting was it to see a naked woman for your first few times of exposure, vs now?
 

Caturdayz

Smash Journeyman
Joined
Mar 11, 2008
Messages
258
Location
Salem, OH
yup, people also still stare, and they also still stalk, and guess what they commit crimes, and wow this is only opening another window to do crimes, this is North Amrica, the majority dont follow what YOU think should be done...if woman are going bare chest, people will stare, and others will act
Sure, they'll stare.
 

Surri-Sama

Smash Hero
Joined
Apr 6, 2005
Messages
5,454
Location
Newfoundland, Canada!
You two are arguing, not debating. The purpose of a debate is to learn from each other's statements.

The increase in **** is just a fantasy already disproved by Quilt. If you think about it, people wouldn't care after a while.(If this topless thing was to be pulled off)

How old are you? How exciting was it to see a naked woman for your first few times of exposure, vs now?
aye aye, your right i was argueing, and now ive been disproven, for shame :o

lol im jk, but i do belive your both Right , you and Quilt, but i still think Caterdayz is being a bit to...aggressive o.o;;
 

Caturdayz

Smash Journeyman
Joined
Mar 11, 2008
Messages
258
Location
Salem, OH
I honestly didn't know I was arguing with Sirhc until it was pointed out to me. My original post was actually aimed at Iwontgetoverthedam...

And I am sorry if I am being to aggressive however, it doesn't make sense to me that women have to cover up any more than men do... its hypocritical.
 

Teebs

Smash Champion
Joined
Feb 7, 2006
Messages
2,362
Location
The Illinois Sticks
NNID
Teebs-kun
I can't see this being hypocritical, men don't have anything considered a "private part" on their chest, while women do. It's just the way we were made. This may sound like a small child answer, which is not it's intention.
 

Caturdayz

Smash Journeyman
Joined
Mar 11, 2008
Messages
258
Location
Salem, OH
I can't see this being hypocritical, men don't have anything considered a "private part" on their chest, while women do. It's just the way we were made. This may sound like a small child answer, which is not it's intention.
Women only have a "private part" on their chest because Men sexualized their chests. Honestly if there wasn't a taboo about women exposing their breast than we would not be having this debate...
 

Koskinator

Smash Lord
Joined
Oct 14, 2007
Messages
1,602
Location
Kelowna, BC Canada
3DS FC
3308-4564-8881
Well, if you think about it, topless women are in the media all the time, eventually it will get to the point where female breasts will no longer be considered nudity because we see them all the time.
 

Surri-Sama

Smash Hero
Joined
Apr 6, 2005
Messages
5,454
Location
Newfoundland, Canada!
Women only have a "private part" on their chest because Men sexualized their chests. Honestly if there wasn't a taboo about women exposing their breast than we would not be having this debate...
im not 100% sure but this may not be true, protection of the breast dates back to long before "sexuality" had problems in socity, it was done so the they would have less chance of getting cut/damaged as breasts milk is very valuable to a baby.

And as for hypocrisy, its kinda funny to think about but, its like saying

"why are men who play hockey forced to wear cups, while girls are not, its sexist!"
 

Eor

Banned via Warnings
BRoomer
Joined
Jan 2, 2003
Messages
9,963
Location
Bed
I don't quite understand why this topic is only referring to topless woman, because honestly there is no reason to say that woman should be allowed to go topless but not completely naked. It's not our culture that has sexualized breasts, it's biological. Most cultures that allow woman to go around topless don't have strong stances on men or woman covering themselves at all, because it's just not how their culture works. To me, whether or not woman should be allowed to be topless at certain areas depends on the anatomy of it, whether breasts are so sexual to us for biology or a different reason. A muscular man's chest is sexual for a woman, and I'm not sure how different the two truly are. Maybe if men had to wear full bodysuits it'd be considered the same.
 

Zero Beat

Cognitive Scientist
Joined
Apr 12, 2006
Messages
3,924
Location
MIT Observatory
NNID
BLUE
3DS FC
4141-3279-8878
Following up on that, I think that part of it stems from females always covering and protecting their skin from the public eye many many years ago.

Same thing goes for getting married at a church. It's become more of a societal norm than a religious act of love.
 

Caturdayz

Smash Journeyman
Joined
Mar 11, 2008
Messages
258
Location
Salem, OH
"why are men who play hockey forced to wear cups, while girls are not, its sexist!"
These issues are completely unrelated. Wearing cups are for safety. A piece of cloth maybe 1/4 inch thick isn
't protecting anything.

I don't care if women can go topless honestly, but if they can't then men shouldn't be able to.

I am a believer in 100 percent equality... Women have been pushed around since the dawn of man.
 

Surri-Sama

Smash Hero
Joined
Apr 6, 2005
Messages
5,454
Location
Newfoundland, Canada!
These issues are completely unrelated. Wearing cups are for safety. A piece of cloth maybe 1/4 inch thick isn
't protecting anything.

I don't care if women can go topless honestly, but if they can't then men shouldn't be able to.

I am a believer in 100 percent equality... Women have been pushed around since the dawn of man.
And bras are for support, which im not fully sure would be..good for you, healthy living i suppose you could call it :p

So i guess the choice should be there, but wouldnt it Subliminally saying "i choice freedom, (which i think we proved is non existent anyhow) over better health" hmm touche :\
 

Caturdayz

Smash Journeyman
Joined
Mar 11, 2008
Messages
258
Location
Salem, OH
I don't care if women go around naked or dressed as nuns but they should be equal to men, they are not inferior even if they are treated that way still.

Also women don't have to wear bras 24/7. Even if women were allowed to go topless its not like they would be walking around the office with breasts hanging out (last time I checked men didn't do that either). It would be primarily at beaches, hot summer days, or protests (although allowing them to do it would take away the power that the current nudity protests boast of).
 

Caturdayz

Smash Journeyman
Joined
Mar 11, 2008
Messages
258
Location
Salem, OH
I think they are being hypocritical. You see if men were to walk around with no clothes, i can gaurentee that women would have a problem with it, also how is not wearing a top a leisure.
But men CAN walk around without a top... thus this argument. No one is saying they should run around streaking...
 

Shök

Smash Champion
Joined
Jun 24, 2007
Messages
2,251
Also, they say that they get to chose when or when not their chest should be sexual.

Its not being immature, but that will be hard to do.
 

ComradeSAL

Smash Journeyman
Joined
Nov 27, 2001
Messages
223
Location
Ft. Collins, CO
if you play professonaly it is.

so Caturdayz if you belive in equality do you think all womans leagues and such should be removed, and woman should be forced to play with men in sports, i mean thats equal right?
And professional swimmers will have to keep wearing bras. Requiring something to be in a private institution is not the same as requiring something to be in a public area. That's why the Boy Scouts can be homophobic, but I can kiss men at a swimming pool.
 

RBinator

Smash Journeyman
Joined
Jul 4, 2007
Messages
314
Location
...In America!
Long post incoming...

To allow women without any tops, in a nutshell, yes, but if that’s all I said without giving any reasons, this really wouldn’t be a debate now would it? So I’m gonna back it up, with several paragraphs.

Quite frankly, I think it’s sexism that women are still treated like criminals for having their breasts exposed while men are not. I’m not saying those who believe that are sexists, I just feel the concept itself is. I’m fully aware that men and women are different and that women’s breasts tend to be viewed as sexual objects. However, does being different have to be a crime? Is it not America society that has turned women’s breasts into sexual objects? How does the sight of a female breast or two directly harm a person? How do large and round breasts on a female body cause damage? What about women who have flat breasts? I prefer to use the term topfree, rather than topless, to better express the ideals of freedom of a woman without her top on, rather than the more sexual meaning of topless. I didn’t make the term up, I found it elsewhere.

What do we gain from making female breasts offensive? What good comes out of being shocked from seeing a nipple on a breast attached to a female body? How does it help society at all? I say the perfect example of this was during the 2004 Super Bowl Halftime show. Yes, it was unexpected, and yes, millions of viewers were watching, including many children. It was almost like America had a meltdown, all because of a female breast. This doesn’t at all seem out there? A guy could have taken his shirt off during that event and at best there would have been a few complains. Someone could have been shot and killed during the event and I’m sure there would be less of an outburst then an exposed female breast. Kinda an over the top example, but see where I’m coming from? A sight of a body part being considered this dangerous in America compared to other stuff like physical violence is really saying a lot to me.

About men staring at breasts, it’s not like it doesn’t already happen with the cleavage of breasts being exposed or even breasts being covered altogether. Isn’t it not already bad social manners to stare at any part of a stranger? Many talk about looking at female breasts and thus feeling arousal; however, if this was such a normal thing, would it really feel like anything special after awhile? Since it isn’t currently like this in America, thinking of how this would be might be very hard. It’s not like in certain other countries of the world where women normally don’t wear tops, men are always feeling arousal.

If topfree women were a reality, female breasts won’t be something so “dirty” that you can only see them in a few select places, be it magazines, the Internet, or other places. This could greatly reduce any arousal gained from such a sight. Basically, it would be normal, and not something rare that many were jump at the chance to see. Also, not every woman is gonna be someone’s idea of a super model or “perfect” body. So, assuming a woman could legally expose her breasts, what are we gonna do, prevent any woman from going topfree that doesn’t mean the standards of beauty? So it’s more important to please those who act like they have a right to not see anyone they don’t consider beautiful, more so then a woman’s right to go topfree [if it were legal]? Just food for thought.

As for sexual crimes going up because of topfree women becoming legal, it sounds like the victim, and not the victimizer, is being blamed. So, because a man decides he wants to commit a sexual crime against a topfree woman, it’s suddenly the woman’s fault and not the man’s? It’s not his fault if he decides looking at breasts is more important than keeping his eyes on the road? “A man had no control over his sexual desire” suddenly makes the woman in the wrong?

We seriously got much worse problems then woman’s breasts if we think a man isn’t fully in the wrong for carrying out a sexual crime, especially on the grounds of “he couldn’t help himself”, regardless if a woman was in a state of dress that the man sexual liked. It reminds me of similar cases involving **** crimes, that a woman “was asking for it” and that a man “couldn’t control himself”. It’s almost like it only matters what men feel and think and not women in society. Nothing forces a man to **** a woman. A woman’s body doesn’t magically cause a man to jump on her like a wild beast and do whatever he wants to her. I don’t think the topfree movement will make much progress if people are still thinking a woman is at fault and/or that a man is in anyway justify for committing a sexual crime against said woman.

While not totally related, there are people that still get up all fired up and angry over a woman breast feeding in public. Often, women are asked to cover up with a toilet, go into a dirty restroom, or even leave the place altogether. So, the baby has to be subjected to being under a blanket or in a dirty restroom because some people act like the nipple on a woman’s breast is dangerous if seen? If the woman isn’t sitting across from them, it’s not like they have to look. Also, it’s not like the woman is trying to put on a show for men to get all existed that she has a breast exposed. Basically, America’s female breast taboo is so bad that a woman can’t even feed her child using her own body produced milk without any problems from others choosing to get offended. As for the people against breast feeding like this, it seems to usually be other women. On a side note, from what I heard, men can breast feed too, but it takes a lot more work and may or may not be as effective as a woman taking care of that task.

Well, what about the children? Won’t their lives be turned upset down if they see a pair of female breasts? Only if their taught to. It’s not like we’re born and then automatic feel shocked over female breasts, but not male breasts, especially for those who have been breastfed. We have to be taught that and I don’t mean directly like “it’s shameful for a woman to have her breasts exposed”, but indirectly, like women acting shameful over not having a top on. It’s like its ok for a girl to not have to cover up till she gets a little older and breast development begins, then suddenly, it becomes a crime to not cover up.

That’s the other issue too, body shame. What good does a low self-esteem over your own body do? How does being scared over strangers, or even friends and family, seeing certain parts of your body do you any good? I can understand not wanting any random stranger try to jump on you and do something, but what about in front of well known and trusted people? Is it because of how women’s breasts are treated like sex objects? Is our view point over female breast so narrow that they can’t possibly be anything more than objects of desire for men? Do women even own their own bodies or is their body a slave to men?! If society keeps acting like this, it’s not gonna change unless small and even baby steps start with changing the whole mind set around. Of many problems going on in society and the rest of the world, we’re still having problems with human appearances.

The majority of women for so long (at least in America) have accepted ideas like this that likely wouldn’t want to take part in taking their tops off just like men. Heck, many would be against other women wanting to do the same, usually on the grounds of the common beliefs surrounding it. There’s even women out there who are very against public breast feeding, at least if a breast is visible.

I think it’s long overdue that women stop being treated like criminals for exposing a part of their body that men can legally do so. I think it’s long overdue that men are not entirely blame for any sexual crimes they commit against women and that “they couldn’t help it” reason is considered invalid and killed on the spot. I think it’s long overdue that breasts on a woman’s body stops being treated as merely sexual desires for men. I think it’s long overdue that women are no longer taught that their breasts are “bad” and must be covered, especially so they don’t get ***** by men. I know I started off every sentence with the same line in this paragraph, but moving on…

I didn’t always think this way regarding this issue. Had I been here talking about something like this about five years ago, I might have thought like many other people on this issue. The thing is, I just accepted the common beliefs and never questioned why they were like that. Over the years, from mostly reading stuff on certain websites, I become much more of a free thinker in various issues, this being one of them. Even thinking back, I’m having a very hard time pinpointing a reason why female breasts were so “bad”.

As much as I want this to become legal, I don’t see it happening in my life time, especially when other women are sometimes the ones who put these ideas into their own heads and fight against other women who challenges what they been taught to accept. It’s not like women’s breasts will never in some way not be viewed and treated as sexual objects, it’s that I think currently, its way overboard as it currently is in America.
 

Surri-Sama

Smash Hero
Joined
Apr 6, 2005
Messages
5,454
Location
Newfoundland, Canada!
And professional swimmers will have to keep wearing bras. Requiring something to be in a private institution is not the same as requiring something to be in a public area. That's why the Boy Scouts can be homophobic, but I can kiss men at a swimming pool.
This still goes agesnt the eqaility Caturdayz is talking about..
 

Caturdayz

Smash Journeyman
Joined
Mar 11, 2008
Messages
258
Location
Salem, OH
so Caturdayz if you belive in equality do you think all womans leagues and such should be removed, and woman should be forced to play with men in sports, i mean thats equal right?
You know when I said equality I was refering to rights... Not women leagues, there are issues of fairness in sports between men and women.

These are completely unrelated and I don't understand why you even made such a weak attempt of discrediting me...

That's why the Boy Scouts can be homophobic
I hate boy scouts, and homophobes.

Really intolerant you know?
 

Surri-Sama

Smash Hero
Joined
Apr 6, 2005
Messages
5,454
Location
Newfoundland, Canada!
You know when I said equality I was refering to rights... Not women leagues, there are issues of fairness in sports between men and women.

These are completely unrelated and I don't understand why you even made such a weak attempt of discrediting me...



I hate boy scouts, and homophobes.

Really intolerant you know?
im not discrediting you, im mearly using your system agesnt you, its just as fair as the topless problems, you just dont want to admit the world will be full of "unfairness" due to the fact that man and woman are NOT exactly the same, but i geuss some peopel will never get that :\
 

Taymond

Smash Journeyman
Joined
Sep 4, 2007
Messages
494
Location
UIUC/Chicago South Suburbs
This is an interesting topic. There's conflicting opinions all around, but I think some progress is being made, at least. I do, however, think that both sides of this discussion are taking the situation to the wrong extremes.

For starters, I don't think it's just for their to be actual laws prohibiting women from acting this way. In a different era, it might've seemed like certain clothing, or lack thereof, should be justifiably illegal, but I don't believe that holds today. The world in general is becoming much more tolerant and less uptight. The process is slow, yes, but there is definite progress in the direction of equality. In such a relatively tolerant time, the government shouldn't be able to justify such direction say in what women do and do not wear. People should be able to do what they wish with their own bodies, including exposing parts of it, if that's what they choose. Our bodies are our own, and the decisions about how we treat them should be our own, as well. Previous posters have stated this much more eloquently than I, I just wanted to make my personal opinion known before continuing.

The first point I want to address is the opinion that women who choose to go topless will increase the rate of sexual crimes. I will acknowledge that it's not impossible that the complete exposure of a woman's breasts could break down the last final shred of hesitation between to ****/not to **** in an already-deviant person. I would like to suggest, though, that that particular case is unlikely.

In our society, there is already an enormous amount of exposure with some women's outfits. At beaches in particular, some women wear bathing suits that already cover absolutely nothing but their nipples. Anyone who wants to look can see everything there is to see. The step towards complete upper nudity is a small one, indeed. How large is there a difference between the two situations that the sudden exposure of nipples should spike sexual crimes?

At most, the complete exposure might shift the targets of sexual crimes, rather than increase them to include these newly-nearly-naked women, but even that is a little dubious. The majority of **** crimes (60-80% by one statistic) are classified as "acquaintance ****," commonly known as "date ****," where the assailant is someone the victim knows, not a stranger. The presence of topless women in the community should have little effect on this portion of **** cases.

Additionally, **** is about power as much, if not more, than it is about sex. Rapists target weaker, less-defensible women, not necessarily women they find more attractive. A topless victim is no more likely to be chosen than a clothed victim, unless the assailant perceives her to be particularly weak. The presence of topless women in the community should have little effect on the targets of non-acquaintance ****, either.

The people who commit **** are already deviant. In most of the world today, there is already an enormous amount of exposure and casual flirtation in casual encounters. Of behavior that might encourage ****, we already have about as much as we possibly can. The effect of allowing women to go topless is just a drop of water in an atmosphere already dripping with sexual influences.

Now, I'll take a moment to address laws in general. Laws are made to protect the people they represent. If it could be proven that woman who went topless were at a significantly increased risk of ****, the government has a right to defend its people. A law in such a case could be at least partially defensible. I fully do not believe, however, that topless women would be at any larger a risk than normal women, or that that could be proven even if it were the case.

As for claims that allowing women to go topless would lead to lesser sexual taboo focused towards breasts.. I have some reservations. I speak only about the American people here, as I have no direct experience with any other society. I firmly doubt that such a lessening in taboo would occur. If such a law were passed, not all women would choose to participate. I would go as far as to say that the women who chose to participate would probably be a minority. A minority can never be seen as the "norm," and children raised in such an environment will not be thoroughly desensitized towards the taboo. Because many women choose not to expose themselves as such, it will still remain blatantly clear that such a taboo does exist, and that taboo will be reinforced by a majority of the new generations.

I think it's a little too optimistic to think that any significant progress could be made towards the reduction of the breast taboo by the passing of such a law. In communities that have allowed such practices and the taboo does not exist, it was only removed through generations upon generations of experience, and likely through a majority of women choosing to partake. As long as a majority does not participate, the taboo will not be greatly reduced.
 

The Executive

Smash Lord
Joined
Feb 22, 2005
Messages
1,434
Location
Within the confines of my mortal shell in T-Town.
Quote in first post said:
We women would like to decide by ourselves when our breasts should be sexual and when not
How does this work? With the Western media (particularly America) working as hard as they can to inject massive doses of sexuality into every facet of life, how could you possibly "decide" when your breasts are sexual and when they aren't? That's ludicrous!
 

Siamese Lizard

Smash Apprentice
Joined
Apr 10, 2008
Messages
176
I would like to say that, I know more about breast than anyone, I have seen them before and they are nice. Women should be topless and proud. Most women rather wear clothing because it hides their breast, if it is not to nice(like a guy that is very skinny or to fat, he doesn't want to go topless with his man breast and belly).

Breast get pretty heavy and will cause them back pains, if they are topless all the time, so they would need a bra to support the breast. There is also women that want to make their breast look bigger with push up bras and so on. The problem also is that men already have no ability to concentrate when women are around with less clothing, so imagine naked. Not really **** but alot of men are going to over flow topless women by just trying to get a number and hook up, like they do with women with less clothes.

Now, these women will not be taken to seriously on a professional level, just as if they had less clothes "skimpy" like a man that is topless or have dumb clothes, it just isn't seen as professional in our society, and until that changes, there is nothing we can do about that. Women have to carry a shirt so if they go in a certain professional place or even a restaurant, they have to put the shirt back on anyway, just like men.

Finally, why argue so full forced for topless women/men? Why not argue for full nudity? What is wrong with full nudity? is the *****/****** banned because they can connect?

Allow to show topless women on local tv channels, next time you watch full house, you will see naked breast and it should be fine.

Why is this thread labeled as mature content? if it was topless men, would it be labeled? no, breast are breast, they should roam free, stop acting immature on the issue at hand.

Breast is not going to harm anyone. I rest my case.
 

Biggie Smalls

Smash Lord
Joined
Aug 9, 2007
Messages
1,247
I honestly don't care. People were not born with clothes on. Women's boobs being sexual is just a marketing lie to sell porno. I mea seriously, what IS the difference, Men walk around barechested, why can't women? Normally as a man some feminist things piss me off, but this is kinda stupid. When I swim, I'm barechested. There really is no reason to ban it, it's not too big of a deal.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom